I thought I would start this thread to address some things I was trying to discuss in the closed thread. There are some teachings within religious tradition which seem to me are clearly causing the world a great deal of strife.

1)Telling people they will burn in eternal hell fire for not engaging in certain rights and rituals.

2)Teaching people that the ethnicity one is born into can make you so impure that to even touch you brings evil and curses on you and your family

3)Teaching that acts of murderous aggression in the name of a creator god can bring you eternal happiness

I think there are many more but these three alone are prominent enough to have direct and detrimental influence on the daily lives of hundreds of millions if not billions of people.

I think if we pay attention with kindness we can not but feel that it is critically important to look for any effective opportunity to lessen peoples confidence in such beliefs. Is it really all that appropriate to simply say that such and such religion is just different than your own not better or worse when there are teachings which seem so obviously not in peoples best interest?

HMMMM?

Gabe

"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

There is tollerance and then there is not trying to understand where the beliefs come from and how they are held and what can be done so that these beliefs don't inpact negatively on anyone.

as in all likelihood no-one who holds such beliefs will be members here how would discussing and speculating help?

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Simply put, tolerance means being tolerant of something. It doesn't necessarily mean liking it, or even accepting it... merely that you tolerate it, you put up with it, you endure it... you allow it to be. Tolerance is good practice... only when you're not wanting to change things are you content with how things are.

Metta,Retro.

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

retrofuturist wrote:Simply put, tolerance means being tolerant of something. It doesn't necessarily mean liking it, or even accepting it... merely that you tolerate it, you put up with it, you endure it... you allow it to be. Tolerance is good practice... only when you're not wanting to change things are you content with how things are.

Actually, we human tolerate a lot things we do not like so much but have no choice in the matter as to whatever-it-might-be's existence. Can't do anything about it, so we tolerate it, though we might complain a bit. Sometime we should not be content with how this are. There are things that should not be tolerated.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Actualy, see what you can do with your copy machine and I am sure one of the computer wizards here can turn it into a smilie type thingie for us to use with just with your face rather than one of those annoying (but having no choice I have tolerate them) stupid yellow things we see on the right side of the screen that people put into their msgs thinking it all so clever of them to use.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Sometime we should not be content with how this are. There are things that should not be tolerated.

Like dukkha.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Sometime we should not be content with how this are. There are things that should not be tolerated.

By what criteria would these be determined?

Metta,Retro.

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

tiltbillings wrote:Sometime we should not be content with how this are. There are things that should not be tolerated.

By what criteria would these be determined?

Damdifino. We some time tolerate a racist joke told in a group of people, but should we? Probably depends upon the context. You know the expression Jim Crow Laws? This is something from US history. Whites only laws found in the South. Eventually enough people found them intolerable, found the strength to speak out against them.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Actualy, see what you can do with your copy machine and I am sure one of the computer wizards here can turn it into a smilie type thingie for us to use with just with your face rather than one of those annoying (but having no choice I have tolerate them) stupid yellow things we see on the right side of the screen that people put into their msgs thinking it all so clever of them to use.

Go easy mate! My young son visits these forums and he just loves those smileys so much that I have to restrain him from inserting more than one per line. Having said that, I am no fan of the little horrors (smileys, NOT eight year olds!).Kind regards

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

I thought I would start this thread to address some things I was trying to discuss in the closed thread. There are some teachings within religious tradition which seem to me are clearly causing the world a great deal of strife.

1)Telling people they will burn in eternal hell fire for not engaging in certain rights and rituals.

2)Teaching people that the ethnicity one is born into can make you so impure that to even touch you brings evil and curses on you and your family

3)Teaching that acts of murderous aggression in the name of a creator god can bring you eternal happiness

I think there are many more but these three alone are prominent enough to have direct and detrimental influence on the daily lives of hundreds of millions if not billions of people.

I think if we pay attention with kindness we can not but feel that it is critically important to look for any effective opportunity to lessen peoples confidence in such beliefs. Is it really all that appropriate to simply say that such and such religion is just different than your own not better or worse when there are teachings which seem so obviously not in peoples best interest?

A Mawkish1983 smilie would be great. Eight year olds using smilies is a thing of goodness.

Now, I got that out of my system, I feel better.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

LOL, i wonder how our communication might go if we were restricted only to the single original smiley...

Concerning tolerance, isnt the essential distinction internal, not external? We do indeed need to speak up about racism, militarism, xenophobia, religious violence and all the other crazy things humans do...

But how are you feeling about that, how are you thinking about it? If you find yourself constantly spinning thoughts and emotions related to these crazy things, the dukkha of others, that dukkha now becomes your dukkha as well.

"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

christopher::: wrote:But how are you feeling about that, how are you thinking about it? If you find yourself constantly spinning thoughts and emotions related to these crazy things, the dukkha of others, that dukkha now becomes your dukkha as well.

The pedantic wretch in me says: Technically... no! One's own dukkha is born from one's own kamma.Having said that, I don't mean we should do nothing when some horror is unleashed upon ourselves or others.

I do know what you mean. Equanimity is a path factor for a very good reason.Metta

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

tiltbillings wrote:A Mawkish1983 smilie would be great. Eight year olds using smilies is a thing of goodness.

Now, I got that out of my system, I feel better.

I'll be sure young Quinn gets to see your handiwork the next time we[re both on together. and given my work commitments for the coming 48 hours, it could be a few days away!Cheers

Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

christopher::: wrote:But how are you feeling about that, how are you thinking about it? If you find yourself constantly spinning thoughts and emotions related to these crazy things, the dukkha of others, that dukkha now becomes your dukkha as well.

The pedantic wretch in me says: Technically... no! One's own dukkha is born from one's own kamma.Having said that, I don't mean we should do nothing when some horror is unleashed upon ourselves or others.

I do know what you mean. Equanimity is a path factor for a very good reason.Metta

Ben

Hi Ben! Technically speaking, given that the "self" is an illusion of sorts, isn't there also a collective element to karma and dukkha, in that its born of our interactions, reactions, responses, etc?

"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

Manapa wrote:There is tollerance and then there is not trying to understand where the beliefs come from and how they are held and what can be done so that these beliefs don't inpact negatively on anyone.

as in all likelihood no-one who holds such beliefs will be members here how would discussing and speculating help?

No, it is not likely that anyone here will hold these beliefs. However it seems that some people here overlook aspects within religious tradition that in my view are often very harmful to the practitioner and people who are not practitioners. I am in total agreement with defining religious tolerance as the cultivation of non aversion in the face of things we either do not understand or that we simply disagree with. That is why I said "I think if we pay attention with kindness we can not but feel that it is critically important to look for any effective opportunity to lessen peoples confidence in such beliefs."

This is not really a matter of speculation. I have a number of friends who were born into the Dalit class in India. Even though they have converted to Buddhism they still have to interact with people who's religion has taught that they are virtually cursed with impurity.

Kindly

Gabe

"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

tiltbillings wrote:Sometime we should not be content with how this are. There are things that should not be tolerated.

It's not a matter of "should" or "should not." It's a matter of seeing things as they are and recognizing our own reaction to that. Reacting with contentment and judging that mindstate as "good," hoping it will last, is dukkha. Reacting with discontentment is dukkha. Reacting to dukkha itself with more discontentment is even more dukkha. Retro hit the nail on the head with his post.

Hi Christopher,

christopher::: wrote:Hi Ben! Technically speaking, given that the "self" is an illusion of sorts, isn't there also a collective element to karma and dukkha, in that its born of our interactions, reactions, responses, etc?

Technically speaking, it doesn't matter with regard to practice. To what extent can any of us control another, and how much effort should we exert trying to do so? Those questions need to be answered on a case-by-case basis, and the answer we come up with will always be our own kamma. We always have the same localized basis for practice, here and now. But we can look to mudita to have a better understanding of this "illusion" of self versus others.

Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,But never soddens what is open;Uncover, then, what is concealed,Lest it be soddened by the rain.